Thank you for the alert. I noted the ROCOR when I was writing the article and thought was strange and hoped some onr would address the point. I went back to the Wikipedia article and found the it was revised on June 1, 2006 after I had originally copied the earlier copy. There are two revisions that got to the current text.

I'll delete the sentence. I also note that Paul Florensky is listed as a new matryr on the Calendar for December 15.

This would mean that it's no longer disputed, yes? — edited by Pιsτévο at 19:08, June 14, 2006 (CDT)

I would hope so. But, then it is easy to "get into hot water" when religion is dicussed. Especially when writing about controversial people!Wsk 19:45, June 14, 2006 (CDT)

Hmm.. Maybe we need to make a distinction in our minds -- he was canonized/glorified as a martyr. That seems pretty clear. Some really like his theological work. Others don't. It doesn't seem to me that "the Church" has pronounced either way on this, right? Fr. John

I'm hardly an expert, but glorification is usually done by a synod - whom was he glorified by? — edited by Pιsτévο at 00:04, June 15, 2006 (CDT)

I don't know, but my impression was simply that he was glorified together with the New Martyrs. Via Google, I found a couple references but no solid historical account, e.g.:

"The Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia went in its time along the path of the canonization of all Orthodox who suffered at the hands of the bolsheviks. On the icon of ROCOR "Assembly of New Martyrs" there is, in particular, even Fr Paul Florensky, whom I mentioned, despite the fact that in ROCOR there is a rather critical attitude toward his statements and his works." http://www.stetson.edu/~psteeves/relnews/0005e.html